I was not aware of such a program from AKC, and when I have been talking about the Versatility program it was the GWPCA program, set up by the GWPCA and is not a recognized AKC title. Maybe we are all getting a bit confused?

For the GWPCA program, it was written up with the points schedule in the Summer 2003 issue of the Wire News.

If versatility is to be redefined (show, obedience, agility, etc), the breed will see no progress. Just as today, you will continue to see the vast majority seek the minimum for recognition (CH and JH as mentioned for example).

I don't believe that the GWP will ever see more than a very few devoted enthusiasts that will seriously persue the versatile concept. It is the reason I am no longer involved with the GWP. Folks that are seriously commited to that heritage belong in the VDD where the total concentration of the organization is concentrated on the complete versatile dog from VJP (natural ability) to the VGP (2 day utility test) right up to 40 hour blood track testing. I often hear folks say that tracking rabbits or 20/40 hour old blood tracks have nothing to do with what the US hunter does. That may be true but the real advantage of these evaluations is to identify the breeding stock with the better instincts, nose, trainability, stability, etc. A 10-12 month dog that can track a hare or rabbit through broken cover or even over bare ground shows a lot more than a dog that tracks a mature pheasant running through grass. When that pup will also break off the track on whistle command, we have a high drive pup(!!) with cooperation.

I have often thought that when we demand less, we get less. Whether that is in testing or in the actual field, when we ask a dog to do the minimal and make our breeding decisions (or title decisions) on the basis of less, we sooner wind up with less, and sometimes a lot less. Where the European registries have been making their testing MORE demanding over the past decades, the US fanciers have been contenting themselves with less.

ME,

Like your idealism, but were the GWP community to adopt your guidelines the genepool would shrink to crisis proportion. There just aren't that many proven versatile dogs that really excel in performance and type,coat. It is a significant problem. Both the show ring and the Field Trial have had a negative effect on the breed. Where the Germans seek to keep the substance and shorter harsh coat, the pressures of FT have led to small, feminine looking dogs. Show dogs have led to longer coated dogs that are easily groomable for the show appearance needed. The two breeds look different today and those that are well versed know this.

KJ

Admire your desire for the high drive dog, just realize that FT is ultimately destructive if followed to its ultimate end. I think the Danes have adopted the best system - no dog can become a Jagtchampion (Hunting Champion) unless it achieves a Prize 1 in versatile testing AND high placings in competitive brace work as well as tracking, conformation evaluation, etc. I see so many dogs in Germany that would be competitive in the US FT game, that as far as I can see the FT game doesn't offer any real benefit to breeding programs. It is just a game for the owner's ego. If FT were to be persued AFTER versatile evaluation, that's great. As a replacement, it leads any versatile breed down the drain.

The greatest concentration of stunning, proven working versatile dogs is in the VDD, which has remained true to its mission. Not perfect but the huge quality genepool speaks for the focus of the organization and its members (11,000 of them!!!). The AKC breed continues to wander in all the various directions its owners lead it without a center - a shared focus or basic priorities._________________Jon P

Admire your desire for the high drive dog, just realize that FT is ultimately destructive if followed to its ultimate end. I think the Danes have adopted the best system - no dog can become a Jagtchampion (Hunting Champion) unless it achieves a Prize 1 in versatile testing AND high placings in competitive brace work as well as tracking, conformation evaluation, etc. I see so many dogs in Germany that would be competitive in the US FT game, that as far as I can see the FT game doesn't offer any real benefit to breeding programs. It is just a game for the owner's ego. If FT were to be persued AFTER versatile evaluation, that's great. As a replacement, it leads any versatile breed down the drain.

Jon,
I agree with all of this. FT dogs with versatile capabililties need to be hand picked but, a DD with some run and style would need to be hand picked as well. I know you always talk of these athletic, fast, stylish DDs but why have they earned the reputation of being big, heavy, slow dogs? I have seen some very nice DDs with medium range and a nice, athletic, medium build but the majority of them are 70+ lb, slower, more methodical dogs. If I saw a number of the DDs like you describe, I would have no problem switching over to DDs. Regardless, I have not seen a great number of DDs but I keep in touch with a lot of people who have seen the so-called greatest DDs and they never describe them as fast, stylish or ground covering dogs. Versatility should be the most important aspect in the GWP (or DD) but, I can not stand hunting over a dog that isn't going to have an aggressive field search and go beyond the comfort level of most hunters, if that's what it takes to find birds. I bred to a european import that was said to be big running for a european dog and have a UT 204/I bitch out of that litter. She is a very striking dog with a beautiful conformation and coat judged dense/harsh. She is a pretty nice dog that with age and confidence (she is 3 1/2)she will get out and run but she is not near the upland bird dog her mom was, nor were the other pups out of that litter but, by versatile standards, they put up pretty good numbers. I guess my point is, for what I like, I can hand pick FT dogs that are versatile or handpick DDs with run and style and I've seen more trial dogs that love the water than DDs that aren't built like a Clydesdale with an acceptable field search .

Dual - I found it on the AKC website. The reason I brought it up is one of the threads was referring to AKC titles and versatility. I just wanted to clarify that the AKC versatility title came about for a different type of versatility - not hunting. But each breed I believe can add a portion to it to make it more specific to that breed, ie. the earthdog aspect of the versatile title for westies.

We didn't join the national GWP club til this fall and so I don't have a copy to see the point schedule for GWP's. Is this an AKC title or one merely being offered by the GWPCA? If it contains conformation, agility, obedience and tracking then it is the AKC title that began I believe in 2001.

Can you post the point schedule you have or send it to me personally? I'd really like to see it!

>>I think without doubt the reason that we are discussing eventual water testing, advanced water testing, AKC versatile programs for the GWP and other versatiles is because of the success of NAVHDA and the other European registries here in the US. >>

Tony - it was because of this comment that I brought up the AKC versatility titles - they don't offer more than one and this post refernces it. I felt that it needed to be seperated from the GWPCA titles that were being mentioned to make the whole thread clearer.

I don't know what you mean by an aggessive search. If I read you right, you mean speed and distance. In my opinion, you are in the wrong breed. The DD was never intended to be a 500+ yd dog or to work like a competitive pointer. I have always been satisfied with a 200 yd dog that is intelligent and working staedily to find game By putting so much emphasis on this one factor, you are showing the same mentality as the show folks only there's all about beauty. This is the reason the breed is so fractured - too many folks worried about there one or two priorities. Don't get me wrong, you've made it clear you want more but it irritates me that folks feel free to make the breed what it was never intended to be because they want it that way. The breed started as a medium range versatile dog of substance, except for perhaps the Weim, the largest of the versatile breeds. In the US there is great pressure to make it a big ranging dog, substance not needed, and the versatile is less important, more or less a retrieving pointer. As I've said before, the VDD is the place for true devotees and versatile enthusiasts. Speed and distance would probably prevent you from being interested, although there are plenty of good going DDs (did the GWPs get that from the EP crossbreeding??). You probably should be in DK or GSP where there is a much stronger FT heritage and a larger number of horseback dogs.

You speak of your young bitch only in terms of her running. A good dog is a package and breeds need good packages. I would think her temperament would be more important, how she took training, her compliance, how dependable, her overall work in all the versatile disciplines, etc. A top notch "head" is way more important than how hot the dog is, as long as there is a good level of desire and talent.

The reason you think that DDs are big, heavy and slow is because you probably aren't well informed about the DD community. Overall, the vast majority of hunters want a dog to hunt with not watch and chase after. The breed was bred for that. Rather than try to change it, why not just find a breed that was bred to do what you want? You seem to be complaining about the lack of dogs with the characteristics you want - sounds to me like you're looking for a dragster in an SUV showroom _________________Jon P

Jon,
What would seperate two dogs of equal in all other abilities, with one dog a closer working dog and one more running more independent and wider for its game, not necissarily needing to keep in eye contact of the handler?
I look at this as a style difference, and there should be room for style differences in a breed. A poor nose, poor coat, dislike for water or lack of cooperation is not a style difference, it is a fault. I feel run, style, coat COLOR and size (within standard) are acceptable differences in style that should be acceptable in the breed.

I think by picking the right FT dogs, versatility can be maintained and the run can be there as well as long as the right breeding is still practiced. I think Three Devils kennel is a great example. Funke's dogs' pedigrees include FC NFC Cascade Steamer, FC Cascade Smokin Jo, FC Bo Taylor v Rahnhaus, and FC NAFC Flintlock's Hawkeye just to name a few. There has been as many Three Devils dogs qualify for the invitational as any german line kennel the last 7 or 10 years. Why? How? ....and they have some fire in their field searches!

Quote:

You speak of your young bitch only in terms of her running. A good dog is a package and breeds need good packages. I would think her temperament would be more important, how she took training, her compliance, how dependable, her overall work in all the versatile disciplines, etc. A top notch "head" is way more important than how hot the dog is, as long as there is a good level of desire and talent.

I agree that mental stabilty is the most important trait. I was only speaking of her run because that is where our ideas differ. My particular bitch is very talented in most areas and that's why I still have her and will be breeding her next week. She was broke very easily before she was two and passed the UT at 24 months. I have shot a couple hundred birds over her (upland and waterfowl) but I am just stating her weakness in my eyes, for what I like in a dog. I have went away from a few highly titled trial dogs because I think they are too soft. I can't stand a soft dog that takes a lot of time to bring up. I prefere a dog that is mentally stable enough to take a lot of training pressure early.

KJ, you wrote'
"What would seperate two dogs of equal in all other abilities, with one dog a closer working dog and one more running more independent and wider for its game, not necissarily needing to keep in eye contact of the handler?"

Here again is an example of wanting to change what was always originally intended to be a main trait of the breed. The contact that would disturb you is exactly what the Europeans have spent years prioritizing. The reason you have problems finding the dog that doesn't look back is because the breed was conceived to work just the opposite. ASgain, sounds like you really want a Pointer.

I have no problem with you wanting a smaller, lighter faster dog with the emphasis on field work as long as the basis is the versatile dog. I haven't seen a lot of Jeff's dogs so I'll have to take your word that they also have the substance, type, etc. that the breed should have (?????). Again, however, your discussion and most everyones shows a clear slant and reinterpretation of the breed - which is the reason why the breed is lacking a strong genetic center. It should be possible to find a few dozen hard coated, well conformed 65-70 lb versatile stud dogs but in fact they aren't there because so many folks are free-wheeling with their own interpretations of the breed. Can't make what the genepool doesn't have._________________Jon P

Talking versatile lines, there have been some very good bitches over the past ten years or so. I've had two, bred a couple more - the Croziers have had a few in their line, the Sowerby's have bred some as well, and there are others. The real difficulty has been the lack of any prepotence -no real breeding lines have developed. Doesn't seem to be a strong genetic core. Jeff Paulus has managed to be pretty successful based on his original Frisco dog. There hasn't been a stud dog with the exception maybe of Kettlecreeks Moe, that has been able to make much of a mark. So many folks want bitches (thinking about puppies probably) that fewer males seem to be developed. I'm sure they're out there, but where? who's word do you trust? and then what are their criteria? That's why its helpful if these dogs will get out to test or compete in a venue where at least you can get some feedback.

I wasn't interested in unproven dogs, little dogs, poor coated dogs, white dogs or dogs without some proof of versatile ability. When you start getting half way critical (leaving out genetic problems, temperament problems, etc.), the selection pool gets real small. In contrast, there are a dozen or more German lines and any type of dog you want (although I tend to stay away from the screamers). And thousands of them are tested and most are hunted - and hunted a lot. When you sift through these, you come up with dozens of solid dogs that offer real potential.

Getting a pup this spring out of a male that has worked over 1000 pieces of small game in the past year. The owner and friends have shot as many as 500 hare on a single day!!!. (Sorry to offend the bird dog purists!!). Dog placed 3rd at the Hegewald and the littermates did very well as well. Hope to improve the odds.

KJ,

Your point about softness is on the money. IMO, FT dogs tend to softness because these dogs are not being asked to take training at an early age. (I used a very big running FT dog once and was astounded at how soft the litter as a whole was.) They are not being selected for early maturity They are also not being asked to "switch gears" and go from field to water to tracking in the matter of an hour or less. I'm sure some can do it but I think the tendency among these specialists is to a less stabile dog mentally - not as mentally tough. No doubt that most pointers can't cope with the demands of versatile work - highly instinctive but not as trainable or flexible mentally._________________Jon P

The softness issue is something I can't understand. Were the Haar Baron dogs soft? They are probably the most common background for most trial lines. It's interesting because in the trial world, the GWPs are softer dogs (and its accepted) but when you get into NAVHDA or the german dogs, the GWPs are probably the toughest dogs.

KJ,
Frankly, I was never impressed with Haar Baron lines but I don't remember them being soft. There are a few that still revere this line but I think that their memories of the dogs may have gotten more overblown with the passing of time. They may have been good for their time but I'd guess today's dogs have gone beyond. The few HB dogs I had contact with were not dogs I would want to own today - a little crazy, nutsey, coats were nothing great, especially the dogs that came through Fritz von Rank (produced good performance dogs), a dog that had a pretty poor coat.

Haar Baron produced quite a string of FT dogs but that is so far back now that I dount there is any genetic strength left. Certainly Cascade was successful with this line. The Hilltop and subsequent Laurwyn and Cassio, lines, etc were mainly show dogs that came down in part form the HB line but the field abilities were largely squandered away in the show ring._________________Jon P

Jon,
When you say you weren't impressed with the HB lines what exactly are you refering to? Did you see the dogs of old or are you talking about the show line they spawned into or the field descendants (the purest probably through steamer)? It seems as the weak points I have heard of steamer offspring were coats and being a little soft (but, they sure ran like hell ). You say the ones you have seen had some mental issues....I would consider being soft a type of mental stability so maybe a better question would be "Did the HB dogs have mental stablity issues (in their various forms)"?